Riaa curve

Dear Eldartford: +++++ " original point was that 0.1 dB is readily obtainable and more than adequite.... " +++++

adequite?, for whom?. Certainly your " goals " are really different that the ones in other people like me.

How do you know what is adequite and what is not if you never had the opportunity to compare about?, your statement make no sense.

IMHO the mediocrity that surround the audio industry has its origins ( between other things ) in the mediocrity of the whole audio industry goals, there is almost no attitude to be better and why to worry in be better when the customers don't ask for more.

Fortunatelly there are designers like Ralph, my self and others that still care to growing up making better designs out of the mediocrity of the whole audio industry in where the customers are the main part.

I respect your attitude in the RIAA subject, it is an easy one where you don't really cares about where you don't ask for anymore where you don't ask for a better audio items and that attitude is fine with me and fortunatelly does not affect my spirit to improve and be better.

Regards and ejoy the music,
Raul.

Rauliruegas...There are more important things for you and Ralph to worry about than 0.01 dB RIAA accuracy. Neither you nor Ralph have suggested a reason why high accuracy RIAA is important when other elements of the system are so much worse with respect to frequency response. As an engineer, I know it's so much fun to see how good you can make your design that it's easy to loose sight of the real performance requirements.

Eldartford, that one is easy! We use a linear recording method, even if recording digitally. By that I mean linear as opposed to logarithmic.

The linear system requires flat frequency response. So we adhere to getting the RIAA correct in the same way that we make the linestage and amplifier absolutely flat frequency response.

IOW, its easy to get 0.1 or better flat frequency response from the AUX input, if we can do that then the phono should have the same benefit. Perhaps I should say *especially* the phono should have that benefit, since, for many, like myself, it is the primary playback source.

Funny, as I follow this % back and forth, I think of cartridge specs. - quoted cartridge specs - also in 0.2dB region say of channel balance.
Then we test this baby - ha, ~1,8dB........ and all say wow, sounded marvellous. Brinkmanship?

Who I ask, of any end-user will be the judge that these specs are actually the case?

Sorry, to say that testing of some of these claimed specs, made me highly critical or non-believing.

As the saying goes: "Paper is patient..."
Greetings,

Maybe I aught to mention, I'm well acquainted with:

- MIL spec requirements
- Hi-Rel component testing and selection
- Hot handling (testers)
- Burn-in of components (re.: child-mortality)

i.e. Component assembly and Testfield procedures, and MIL spec QA requirements.

It could well be the reason I have a healthy respect of what is required to achieve superiour - long term - stabilty, never mind 1ppm failure rates, 0.01% tolerances.

All of this hi-spec stuff has to come at a PRICE!
I am hearing it loud and clear, when Eldartford is weary of over-engineering, just because 'we can' and not because it is a clear requirement in the first place.
Greetings,